C'mon... Vote to impeach Bush

[Booster]

I think Bush is a nice guy. I fully agree with his policy on Iraq, it's a pity that these European governments are holding back the strike. All these anti-war protests make me feel so angry, almost sick.

 

[pandapanda]

Originally posted by: Spamela
LOL. clearly it doesn't, since the distribution of income is substantially in favor of the rich
(see here and then cry me a river).

it helps to have friends in high places in order to stay rich.

Are you not understanding the chart? Of COURSE rich people have more income than poor--if they didn't they wouldn't be called rich. It's ok for some people to have more money than others--unless you are a socialist.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: tec699
Vote to Impeach Bush

The alleged impeachable acts of President George W. Bush include:

1. Ordering and directing "first strike" war of aggression against Afghanistan causing thousands of deaths;

2. Removing the government of Afghanistan by force and installing a government of his choice;

3. Authorizing daily intrusions into Iraqi airspace and aerial attacks including attacks on alleged defense installations in Iraq which have killed hundreds of people in time of peace;

4. Authorizing, ordering and condoning attacks in Afghanistan and Iraq on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties are unavoidable;

5. Threatening the use of nuclear weapons and ordering preparation for their use;

6. Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently proclaiming his personal intention to change its government by force;

7. Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, murder, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners;

8. Authorizing, ordering and condoning violations of rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eight Amendments to the Constitution and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other international protections of human rights;

9. Authorizing, directing and condoning bribery and coercion of individuals and governments to obtain his war ends;

10. Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda and concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment to create a climate of fear and hatred and destroy opposition to his war goals.

President Bush is accused of Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity. No crimes are greater threats to the Constitution of the United States, the United Nation Charter, the rule of law or the future of humanity.

You gotta love it

Idiotic

 

[dabuddha]

And whoever thinks Bush is responsible for the state of our current economy needs to go back to econ 101

 

[3L33T32003]

It's all about the economy. Clinton had a good economy and that's why he had two terms. With this economy, Bush might not win the next election.

He didn't win the last one.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Booster
I think Bush is a nice guy. I fully agree with his policy on Iraq, it's a pity that these European governments are holding back the strike. All these anti-war protests make me feel so angry, almost sick.

You are not alone.
There is such similarity between the last 10 years of Iraqi violations and the time between WW1 and WW2.
After WW1, Germany was under all kinds of restrictions about what kind of military they could maintain. They started violating these restrictions secretly. Soon other countries found out they were violating them, but didn't do anything to stop it. So Germany stopped hiding it and began openly violating the Versaille Treaty by massively building up their military. Still nobody did anything. Eventually, they were strong enough to invade France and WW2 started.
The same thing is happening with Iraq. If we continue to allow them to violate the many UN resolutions that have been passed and do nothing about it, they will eventually have nuclear weapons. And once they use them, France and Germany will ask why we didn't do anything to stop them.
Hell, look at all the liberals talking about how Bush knew about 9/11 and why didn't he stop it.
Since when do we need France and Germany to support us. Look at the past history of those two countries. How dare they do this.

On the good side, we do have quite a few nations supporting us.
Anyone read the open letter in the NY Times?

United We Stand

By Jose Maria Aznar, Jose-Manuel Durão Barroso, Silvio Berlusconi, Tony Blair, Vaclav Havel, Peter Medgyessy, Leszek Miller and Anders Fogh Rasmussen

January 30, 2003

The real bond between the U.S. and Europe is the values we share: democracy, individual freedom, human rights and the rule of law. These values crossed the Atlantic with those who sailed from Europe to help create the United States of America. Today they are under greater threat than ever.

The attacks of Sept. 11 showed just how far terrorists -- the enemies of our common values -- are prepared to go to destroy them. Those outrages were an attack on all of us. In standing firm in defense of these principles, the governments and people of the U.S. and Europe have amply demonstrated the strength of their convictions. Today more than ever, the trans-Atlantic bond is a guarantee of our freedom.

We in Europe have a relationship with the U.S. which has stood the test of time. Thanks in large part to American bravery, generosity and farsightedness, Europe was set free from the two forms of tyranny that devastated our continent in the 20th century: Nazism and communism. Thanks, too, to the continued cooperation between Europe and the U.S. we have managed to guarantee peace and freedom on our continent. The trans-Atlantic relationship must not become a casualty of the current Iraqi regime's persistent attempts to threaten world security.

In today's world, more than ever before, it is vital that we preserve that unity and cohesion. We know that success in the day-to-day battle against terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction demands unwavering determination and firm international cohesion on the part of all countries for whom freedom is precious.

The Iraqi regime and its weapons of mass destruction represent a clear threat to world security. This danger has been explicitly recognized by the U.N. All of us are bound by Security Council Resolution 1441, which was adopted unanimously. We Europeans have since reiterated our backing for Resolution 1441, our wish to pursue the U.N. route, and our support for the Security Council at the Prague NATO Summit and the Copenhagen European Council.

In doing so, we sent a clear, firm and unequivocal message that we would rid the world of the danger posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. We must remain united in insisting that his regime be disarmed. The solidarity, cohesion and determination of the international community are our best hope of achieving this peacefully. Our strength lies in unity.

The combination of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism is a threat of incalculable consequences. It is one at which all of us should feel concerned. Resolution 1441 is Saddam Hussein's last chance to disarm using peaceful means. The opportunity to avoid greater confrontation rests with him. Sadly this week the U.N. weapons inspectors have confirmed that his long-established pattern of deception, denial and noncompliance with U.N. Security Council resolutions is continuing.

Europe has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. Indeed, they are the first victims of Iraq's current brutal regime. Our goal is to safeguard world peace and security by ensuring that this regime gives up its weapons of mass destruction. Our governments have a common responsibility to face this threat. Failure to do so would be nothing less than negligent to our own citizens and to the wider world.

The U.N. Charter charges the Security Council with the task of preserving international peace and security. To do so, the Security Council must maintain its credibility by ensuring full compliance with its resolutions. We cannot allow a dictator to systematically violate those resolutions. If they are not complied with, the Security Council will lose its credibility and world peace will suffer as a result. We are confident that the Security Council will face up to its responsibilities.

Messrs. Aznar, Durão Barroso, Berlusconi, Blair, Medgyessy, Miller and Fogh Rasmussen are, respectively, the prime ministers of Spain, Portugal, Italy, the U.K., Hungary, Poland and Denmark. Mr. Havel is the Czech president.

 

[tcsenter]

Let me guess, this is from the same idiot who organized a "War Crimes Tribunal" in his basement and "convicted" Bush Sr. of War Crimes against Iraq?

That guy is hilarious. Schizophrenia is not always 'nothing to laugh about'.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Spamela

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: bleeb
Bush is doing a good job (if you're wealthy).

The whole "tax cuts only favor the rich" montra is silly. Don't even try it!

i agree. they only substantially favor the rich.

Tax cuts also favor the middle class. Why should tax cuts favor poor people when they don't pay any taxes in the first place. If you are poor, you even get tax "refunds" back when you didn't pay any taxes. It's called Earned Income Credit. The rich and the middle class are the one's that pay all the taxes and make it possible for hundreds of thousands of people in this country to sit on their asses, getting HUD, Food Stamps, and Welfare checks.

Tell me why it is fair that just because someone works hard to educate themselves and make good money, they should have to pay for those who are lazy and don't want to work.

I didn't come from a rich family. And my parents didn't give me a dime to pay for college. All this BS about how poor people cant' afford college makes me sick. Anyone who wants to go to college and work hard can do it. I got government loans to pay for my college. I graduated 2 years ago and joined the middle class. And it makes me sick every time I see how much is taken out of my paycheck. Then I see our old friends who get free rent and food stamps, not because they can't support themselves, but because the guy doesn't like working. How is it fair that I have to pay for their rent and food just because I worked hard and he didn't want to?

 

[wirelessenabled]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
LOL. Everytime we fly into Iraqi airspace to enforce the no-fly zones, the Iraqis claim that we kill civilians. It's sad to see how much more these liberal bed-wetters trust Saddam more than Bush.

Not a question of trusting Saddam more than Bush. They are both proven liars.

Why should we trust a liar as a US President more than we trust a liar as dictator of Iraq?

 

[DT4K]

This part deserves repeating.

Thanks in large part to American bravery, generosity and farsightedness, Europe was set free from the two forms of tyranny that devastated our continent in the 20th century: Nazism and communism.

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
none of those things are illegal as far as precedent is concerned

yeah, that's what i was thinking. i don't like him, but i really don't think he's done anything impeachable.

 

[Spamela]

Originally posted by: pandapanda

Originally posted by: Spamela
LOL. clearly it doesn't, since the distribution of income is substantially in favor of the rich
(see here and then cry me a river).

it helps to have friends in high places in order to stay rich.

Are you not understanding the chart? Of COURSE rich people have more income than poor--if they didn't they wouldn't be called rich. It's ok for some people to have more money than others--unless you are a socialist.

are you not understanding the chart? 20% of the population gets nearly 50% of the income. it's possible to have rich people AND an income distribution that's not as asymmetrical.

 

[tcsenter]

Not a question of trusting Saddam more than Bush. They are both proven liars.

Why should we trust a liar as a US President more than we trust a liar as dictator of Iraq?

Interesting question. Although, I would have to see your evidence of Bush being a "proven liar" before I can indulge it.

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: wirelessenabled

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
LOL. Everytime we fly into Iraqi airspace to enforce the no-fly zones, the Iraqis claim that we kill civilians. It's sad to see how much more these liberal bed-wetters trust Saddam more than Bush.

Not a question of trusting Saddam more than Bush. They are both proven liars.

Why should we trust a liar as a US President more than we trust a liar as dictator of Iraq?

Wait, but character doesn't matter.. isn't that what you libs said during 8 years of Clinton? Now all of a sudden it DOES matter?!

 

[Harvey]

tec699 -- Either you're new to this planet, or you really are dumber than you look. I am no great fan of Bush-lite, and I can think of a few good reasons to consider whether he could be impeached, but most of your list doesn't come close, and much of it was the right thing to do.

1. Afghanistan was dominated by the Taliban, and the "government," such as it was, harbored them. In case you weren't around planet Earth on 9/11, they struck the first blow, so there's no "first strike" issue. Furthermore, they were murderously opperssive against their own population.

2. See #1.

3. The "no fly zones" over Iraq were part of what Saddam accepted at the end of the Gulf War as when we kicked his sorry ass out of Kuwait. If I remember correctly, he was the invader, and we came to their defense. As correct and civil as it may have seemed, at the time, it really is too bad we didn't finish the job and take him out at the time. You're too new, here, to know me, but I'm an old peace and love hippy, and that's what I believe.

4. See #1. It was war, and feces occurs.

5. Threatening to use nukes is one thing you list that may be worth a comment, and he hasn't actually done it, so for now, it's just words. Also, I don't recall that Bushie has authorized first use of nukes. I just think any use of nukes is stupid.

6. Saddam has used poison gas and biological weapons against his own people and Iran. Iraq is a pariah state. As long as Saddam is in charge, their independence and sovereignty is a joke.

7. I agree that some of the Bush adminstration's actions have been unconstitutional, and I think John Ashcroft may be one of the most dangerous men in the country when it comes to threats against our own Constitutional freedoms. I hope the Senate doesn't allow him to pack the Supreme Court with right wing idealogs because that's the place this issue will have to be resolved.

8. See #7.

9. Huh???

10. Personally, I agree with the Canadian legislator who called Bush a moron, but unfortunately, that isn't grounds for impeachment.

All told, your list hits a couple of significant issues in the middle of a mass of raging blatant stupidity. Go somewhere and learn some facts. All you've done, here, is open your mouth wide enough to change feet.

 

[etech]

Harvey, one correction, the no-fly zones were not authorized by the UN. The US and Britain took that action unilaterally long ago. In other words the current Pres. Bush is following a precedent set before he was in office. If it is an impeachable offense the president that authorized it is out of office.

6. Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently proclaiming his personal intention to change its government by force;

Look up the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. Anyone remember who was president then?

 

[nd]

Is that list of "impeachable acts" a joke?

1. Ordering and directing "first strike" war of aggression against Afghanistan causing thousands of deaths;

... but they don't mention WHO died. Civilians? Taliban? And "first strike"? Weren't we attacked in our homeland on 9/11 by those guys?

2. Removing the government of Afghanistan by force and installing a government of his choice;

Okay, which government are they referring to here? Wasn't the Taliban unofficially the dominant government of Afghanistan at this time?

... and it just gets more painful to read from there. I'm interested in the claims about deliberately killing civilians, but aside from that all of their reasons seem to ignore the details to make Bush seem evil.

 

[Dufman]

Originally posted by: tec699
Vote to Impeach Bush

The alleged impeachable acts of President George W. Bush include:

1. Ordering and directing "first strike" war of aggression against Afghanistan causing thousands of deaths;

2. Removing the government of Afghanistan by force and installing a government of his choice;

3. Authorizing daily intrusions into Iraqi airspace and aerial attacks including attacks on alleged defense installations in Iraq which have killed hundreds of people in time of peace;

4. Authorizing, ordering and condoning attacks in Afghanistan and Iraq on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties are unavoidable;

5. Threatening the use of nuclear weapons and ordering preparation for their use;

6. Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently proclaiming his personal intention to change its government by force;

7. Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, murder, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners;

8. Authorizing, ordering and condoning violations of rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eight Amendments to the Constitution and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other international protections of human rights;

9. Authorizing, directing and condoning bribery and coercion of individuals and governments to obtain his war ends;

10. Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda and concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment to create a climate of fear and hatred and destroy opposition to his war goals.

President Bush is accused of Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity. No crimes are greater threats to the Constitution of the United States, the United Nation Charter, the rule of law or the future of humanity.

You gotta love it

but he still didnt get CAUGHT in a sex scandle

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: amdmang
but he still didnt get CAUGHT in a sex scandle

Anyone who gets hung up about a sex scandal without any other info has a shallow concept of what really matters. There were any number of other reasons to get on Clinton's case.

 

[thraxes]

I got news for you: voting dosn't work too well with this guy as proven in 2000

 

[MooseKnuckle]

No thanks.

 

[IGBT]

Thank You So Much .....

> -----If you don't read anything else, read the last item, No. 14.
>
> I recently saw a bumper sticker that said, "Thank me, I voted for
> Clinton-Gore." So, I sat down and reflected on that, and I am sending
> my "Thank you" for what you have done, specifically:
>
> (1)Thank you for introducing us to Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones,
> Monica Lewinsky, Dolly Kyle Browning, Kathleen Willey and Juanita
> Broderick. Did I leave anyone out?
>
> (2)Thank you for teaching my eight year old about oral sex. I had
> really planned to wait until they were older to discuss it with
> them, but now they know more about it than I did as a senior in
> college.
>
> (3)Thank you for showing us that sexual harassment in the work place
> (especially the White House) and on the job is OK, and all you have
> to know is what the meaning of "is" is. It really is great to know
> that certain sexual acts are not sex, and one person may have sex
> while the other one involved does NOT have sex.
>
> (4)Thank you for reintroducing the concept of impeachment to a new
> generation and demonstrating that the ridiculous plot of the movie
> "Wag the Dog" could be plausible after all.
>
> (5)Thanks for making Jimmy Carter look competent, Gerald Ford look
> graceful, Richard Nixon look honest, Lyndon Johnson look truthful,
> and John Kennedy look moral.
>
> (6)Thank you for the 73 House and Senate witnesses who have pled the
> 5th Amendment and 17 witnesses who have fled the country to avoid
> testifying about Democratic campaign fund raising.
>
> (7)Thank you, for the 19 charges, eight convictions, and four
> imprisonments from the Whitewater "mess" and the 55 criminal charges
> and 32 criminal convictions (so far) in the other "Clinton" scandals.
>
> (8)Thanks also for reducing our military by half, "gutting" much of our
> foreign policy, and flying all over the world on "vacations" carefully
> disguised as necessary trips.
>
> (9)Thank you, also, for "finding" millions of dollars--- I really
> didn't need it in the first place, and I can't think of a more well
> deserving group of recipients for my hard-earned dollars than jet
> fuel for all of your globe-trotting. I understand you, the family,
> and your cronies logged in more time aboard Air Force One than any
> other administration.
>
> (10)Now that you've left the White House, thanks for the 140 pardons of
> convicted felons and indicted felons-in-exile. We will love to have
> them rejoin society.
>
> (11)Thanks also for removing the White House silverware. I'm sure that
> Laura Bush didn't like the pattern anyway. Also, enjoy the
> housewarming
> gifts you've received from your "friends."
>
> (12)Thanks to you and your staff in the West Wing of the White House
> for vandalizing and destroying government property on the way out.
> I also appreciate removing all of that excess weight (China,
> silverware,
> linen, towels, ash trays, soap, pens, magnetic compass, flight
> manuals,
> etc.) out of Air Force One. The weight savings means burning less
> fuel,
> thus fewer tax dollars spent on jet fuel. Thank you!
>
> (13)And finally, please ensure that Hillary enjoys the eight million
> dollar advance for her upcoming "tell-all" book and you, Bill, the
> $10 million advance for your memoirs. Who says crime doesn't pay!
>
> (14)The last and most important point - thank you for forcing Israel to
> let Mohammed Atta go free. Terrorist pilot Mohammed Atta blew up a bus
> in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him.
> As
> part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had
> to agree to release so-called "political prisoners". However, the
> Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands. The
> American
> President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State,
> Warren
> Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be released. Thus Mohammed
> Atta was freed and eventually thanked the US by flying an airplane
> into
> Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was reported by many of
> the
> American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first
> identified.
> It was censored in the US from all later reports. Why shouldn't
> Americans
> know the real truth? What a guy!!
>
> If you agree that the American public must be made aware of these facts,
> pass
> this on. God bless America and THANK YOU (once again) for spending my
> taxes
> so
> wisely and frugally.
>
> SINCERELY,
> A US Citizen
>
> P.S.: Please pass along a special thank you to Al Gore for "inventing"
> the
> Internet, without which I would not be able to send this wonderful
> factual e-mail.
>


.

 

[Moonbeam]

IGBT, you've posted a urban legend.

 

[WalMart1564]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
LOL. Everytime we fly into Iraqi airspace to enforce the no-fly zones, the Iraqis claim that we kill civilians. It's sad to see how much more these liberal bed-wetters trust Saddam more than Bush.

\\

AMEN

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Bush will probably be an one term president if the economy does not turn around in time. Other presidents have survived horrendous foreign policy disasters.

Well, even if the economy stays down (which I think will only happen if another catastrophe like Enron or 9/11 happens again), I think Bush will still be re-elected. Have you seen who the Democrats have as their front-runners for the next election? Pretty poor if you ask me. Reminds me of what the Republicans put up against Clinton in '96.